Skip to main content

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: guyzilla Date: Mar 25, 2011 9:40pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Please remove

http://www.archive.org/details/NotOfThisEarth1957
New information has been brought to my attention that this flick is not PD as I previously believed. Check out this post:
http://www.archive.org/post/329013/not-of-this-earth-1961

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cooperway4 Date: Apr 2, 2011 12:55pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Please remove

A copyright notice dated more than one year later than the date of first publication is treated as if there is no notice.

A copyright notice that gives the year as one more than one year later than the actual one, were it accepted as the beginning date for calculating the expiration date, would give the copyright holder a longer term than a copyright on a work for which an accurate notice is given. Rightly, such end-runs are not rewarded. In the 1976 Act, this is treated in §§ 401 and 402, and in § 406(b), which is called “Error in date”.


So the movie IS Public Domain.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Video-Cellar Date: Apr 2, 2011 5:33pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Please remove

Why is that even relevant to this film? The notice was MCMLVI (1956) one year before release. The error in notice applies only to post dating "mistakes" not pre-dating mistakes. For example, if a movie was made in 1954 and had a notice of 1945 its copyright registration was valid. However, it was calculated as if the film was released in 1945 (renewal required in the anniversary window 1972-73) rather than 1954 (renewal required in the calendar year 1982). If a film released in 1954 has a 1955 notice the notice is valid and the registration would need to be renewed in 1983.

Only if the film carried a notice of more than 1 year later than publication, or more than 28 years(for films released up until the end of 1963) or 95 years (for films made 1964 to March 1989) earlier than publication, does the error-in-notice come in to effect and make the copyright invalid.

"Not of this Earth" was released in February 1957. It was registered 28 Feb 1957:
NOT OF THIS EARTH. Allied Artists Pictures
Corp. 67 min., sd., b&w, 35mm.
Allied Artists Pictures Corp.; 28Feb57
(in notice: 1956); LP7737.


The film was properly renewed by Lorimar Productions (who purchased Allied Artists Pictures Corp in 1980) in 1984, which was the calendar year window for the date-in-notice year, 1956:
Not of this earth. By Allied Artists Pictures Corporation.
Type of Work: Motion Picture
Registration Number / Date: RE0000226771 / 1984-12-07
Renewal registration for: LP0000007737 / 1957-02-28 (in notice: 1956)
Title: Not of this earth. By Allied Artists Pictures Corporation.
Copyright Claimant: Lorimar Productions, Inc. (PWH)

Variant title: Not of this earth.
Names: Allied Artists Pictures Corporation
Lorimar Productions, Inc.


This post was modified by Video-Cellar on 2011-04-03 00:33:50

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cooperway4 Date: Apr 2, 2011 5:56pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Please remove

It would be relevant because the uploaded movie had no copyright notice and the link in the parent post was to a thread entitled NOT OF THIS EARTH (1961). Now if 1956 is indeed the date in the notice then my statement would not apply. However, this movie is widely available on Public Domain DVDs. Once again I'm being led to believe that the companies that put these movies out for sale can pay to manufacture and distribute DVDs and do not have access to competent copyright attorneys. That all of a sudden after years of being offered in PD videos that the only ones to ever bring the fact up that the item in question may not be public domain is not the supposed rights holders, but some users here who have taken it upon themselves. Granted I've seen similar renewal data used incorrectly (Captain Midnight for example, which did not meet the period for renewal - so therefore is PD. Yet it was removed with the same logic). However, in this instance the dates and statutes do match provided that there was a valid notice and the notice did in fact state 1956 and on the prints distributed at the time. Remember the information that the copyright office had came from submitted forms, not viewing the actual movie.

I might not know why this movie is treated as public domain by video manufacturers. However, I do know that it is. And from what I've seen over the years, it is very rare for a copyrighted movie to be passed as PD for so ong a period of time and by so many.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: guyzilla Date: Apr 2, 2011 11:34pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Please remove

The date given on the details page (1961) was wrong. I entered that year from a source I believed and have been since shown to be wrong. The reason for it is because I'm no film expert, just a guy who likes old monster flicks and when I find one that is pd, I'll share it. My copy had no notice but I have since learned that it was copyright because it may have been an edited copy (notice removed). I take copyright seriously when I upload so when I'm told one of my uploads is copyright and given good reason, I'll have it taken down. I've been enjoying this site for two years now and so I'm going to do my best to make sure that my uploads are "according to Hoyle".

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: OTRTim Date: Apr 2, 2011 1:36pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Please remove

I think it's a little too late now. The files have been removed,so unless someone wants to reupload it it's gone from IA.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Jeff Kaplan Date: Mar 26, 2011 7:38am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Please remove

removed.